Comment by Jane Waters at the Durst DEIS hearing, March 12, on sections of chapter 8 that pertain to Ground Nesting Birds, Bobolinks and Barred Owls:
Note that the quote “the golf course will provide suitable habitat for ground-nesting species…” is in the Chapter 8 summary on page 8-9 half way down the Mitigation measures on the right hand side. Note that they are not specifically referring to any particular ground nesting species. Also on page 8-115 in the Impacts section they say “Ground nesting birds may also be affected by construction activities during May or June.” In the previous paragraph on the same page it says “Except during the nesting season, birds, including resident species, are the least likely group of animals to be adversely affected directly by site development activities.” Then on page 8-125 (Potential Impacts section) it cites “Loss of ground-nesting bird habitat in oldfields and forests and raptor breeding habitat; e.g., mature deciduous trees in or near mature hardwood swamps and extensive conifer stands.”
Bobolinks:
General comments that pertain:
On page 8-125: re Species of Special Concern: “Many of the species of conservation concern that were observed on the project site (e.g., wood duck, bobolink, eastern wood-pewee, worm-eating warbler, game species such as woodcock and ruffed grouse; and numerous other biota) are noted as vulnerable, declining, regionally scarce or regionally rare by Hudsonia but have been observed by MDRA ((Matthew Rudikoff’s firm)) in other locations within Dutchess County and throughout the Hudson Valley.
On page 8-129: “Adult birds are quite mobile and can readily move away from areas of active construction. However, there is potential for impacts to birds of conservation concern, particularly those confirmed to breed on the project site, during the nesting season (generally April through July for most species of birds.”
On page 8-137 (Mitigation section): Re Community Conservation Areas ((old fields which will be partially protected from development—my words)): “oldfields will be maintained in successional stages which support confirmed or potential usage by particular species of birds; e.g., Northern harrier, Savannah sparrow (and possibly other grassland sparrows), wild turkey, goldfinch and various warblers. Maintenance may include avoidance of field mowing until after September in order to minimize impacts to ground nesting birds and other field nesting birds…..”
Then in the next paragraph: “The most important oldfields in CCAs are those near or bordering Woodward Hill Road where numerous birds were recorded during field surveys, including bobolink south of Woodward Hill Road, approximately 1,500 east of the former Rosenthal Farm.” ((However, if you look at that part of the property on the development plan, they still have 7 houses located on the edges of that field, reached by two private shared roads, one at either end. The block of that field that is not built upon lies next to Woodward Hill Road. Also, the field just above that field on the other side of Woodward Hill Road has part of it preserved (acreage is not clear to me), but with houses and one new road on three sides of that field as well)).
On page 8-139 (Mitigation section): “The design of the golf course will be carefully integrated into the natural surrounding landscape utilizing a minimalist disturbance approach. This will include in some areas the creation of meadow habitat or shrubland transition communities between the manicured golf habitat and the forest edge. Grasslands and meadow areas can provide habitat for ground nesting birds, foraging sites for hawks and mammals, and nectar sources for butterflies, moths, and hummingbirds. Appropriate plantings will also provide winter shelter and food for other bird species.”
On page 8-148-9 (Mitigation section): “Intermittently maintained roughs, as described above, can be landscaped and managed to provide potentially suitable habitat for ground nesting species…”
Barred Owls:
Most of what is relevant is found in Appendix 8.18
Breeding Raptor Survey:
On page 12: Note that in table 4.3.1 there were 18 observations of Barred Owls ((and on page 14 it says 19; perhaps two different times at one play back site, it isn’t clear)). But at least 18 were from different sites on the property or just beyond the boundaries—look at Figure 3 ((I’m looking at a paper copy; it may be hard to see on the website)).
In the last paragraph on Page 12 and continuing on page 13 is the most relevant paragraph to the Barred Owls: “Barred Owls were heard most frequently and at the most locations on the site. Reference is made to Figure 3, which depicts the approximate locations at which Barred Owls were heard calling. Based on the locations of calls heard, Barred Owls seem to occupy or use much of the site. No nests of Barred Owls were found, however territorial calling was heard on repeated occasions from several Playback Stations, suggesting that a bird or birds were on established territories. Therefore Barred Owl was considered a probable breeder on the site according to the New York State Breeding Bird Atlas criteria. The number of probable breeders remains in question, however, since Barred Owl home ranges, which are strongly defended, vary widely in size ranging from 86 to 1,326 ha (Mazur and James, 2000). Consequently, the Carvel property could contain from 1 up to 10 Barred Owl home ranges, based on the size of the property and the variability of potential home range sizes. Appropriate habitat for this species includes large blocks of contiguous mature mixed hardwood forests, near water, a habitat description which applied to many forested areas on the site, and may explain the broad distribution of barred owls throughout the site. Fragmentation of forest habitat tends to favor the more aggressive Great Horned Owl (Mazur and James, 2000).”
On page 14 in the last paragraph: “Barred owl was the most frequently encountered nocturnal raptor (n=19), followed by Great Horned Owl (n=5)…”
On page 15: “No nests for Barred Owl were located, however, frequency and concentration of responses to taped calls suggests that Barred Owl probably nests on the site. A probable number of Barred Owl nests could not be estimated, due to the variable potential size of Barred Owl home ranges.”
In the next paragraph: “Typically Great Horned Owls use similar habitats to Red-tailed Hawks, but Barred Owls appeared to be more dominant on the site, based on the higher number of call responses received from Barred Owls. This may be due to the fact that the site includes large contiguous tracts of mature mixed forest in addition to open areas, so that Barred Owls are somewhat favored over Great Horned Owls.”
Summary of My Comments at the March 12th hearing:
I said I was a birder and gave them some additional sightings I of birds I have seen on the property (kestrel, red shouldered hawk, more red tailed hawks, etc.). I told them the pictured Great Horned Owl nest is likely originally the nest of the red tailed hawks both they and I have seen near that nest and they have likely built another near by.
I said that when birders are talking about ground nesting birds, they are often referring to bobolinks, meadowlarks and certain rare sparrow species. I said you have observed bobolinks on the site and you have said that ground nesting birds can use the golf course in the mitigation section. I said that bobolinks, etc. can not use the golf course and quoted Steve’s email to that effect, giving Steve’s credentials and gave them a copy of your article on conservation and the article on Bobolinks from Connecticut State of the Birds 2008. I said the field on Woodward Hill Road is the critical area that should be preserved and while they are not building on part of the field the houses they do plan there should be moved off the field. Mowing should not be done until after the third week in July.
Back to Milan Insider Home page
